Home Affairs Minister Michael Fahy last night declared that history will not be repeating itself over the issue of commercial immigration.

The “wrongs” of the 1960s, when the United Bermuda Party government attached the right to vote to residency, would not be revisited.

And he dismissed as “scaremongering” and “nonsense” any suggestion that his One Bermuda Alliance Government had already decided to sell passports for cash.

Commercial immigration has been adopted in one form or another in more than 20 countries, and offers everything from residency (Canada) to passports (Malta) depending on the jurisdiction.

While Mr Fahy would not be drawn on what he would like to see happen in Bermuda, he did say that he was not convinced that giving away the vote was the right thing to do.

“I’m not being evasive and I’m not going to pre-empt Cabinet,” he said. “I’m not going to say this is what my preferred option is — I haven’t shared any of that with my own colleagues.

“I am not convinced that you need to give a vote away, I’m not convinced of that, and I am well aware of the history.

“I am well aware of the wrong things that happened in the 1960s, when they changed voting opportunities to bring people in on a short-term basis, and give them a vote.

“It’s not where we are going at all, and it’s scaremongering to say otherwise. Scaremongering is to say that the Government has done a deal already — that’s nonsense.”

Pointing to the One Bermuda Alliance’s commitment to start a conversation on commercial immigration, the Minister said that although everything was being looked at, it was a matter of Bermuda law that “you cannot simply come in and buy a passport”.

“We said in the Throne Speech that we would start the conversation on commercial immigration which has different models in different jurisdictions,” said Mr Fahy. “Some [countries] give residency, some give citizenship, which may or may not attach a vote. We’re looking at everything that’s on the table.

“[But] To get a passport they can’t just fly in and say ‘I want a passport — I’m going to give you $1 million and I want a passport’.

“They have to have a residency requirement under British law of five years, so you’d have to have five years residency,” he said.

“In other words, you’re going to contribute to the economy, you’re going to do certain things, maybe you’d make a significant investment for job creation for Bermudians. This is not another Jobmakers Act.”

As for a final decision on which model best suits Bermuda in terms of commercial immigration options he said: “We have not had any major discussions yet. The people of Bermuda have seen exactly what we have now seen in terms of what happens in other jurisdictions.”

Mr Fahy also made a point of emphasising the difference between holding a Bermuda passport and being able to vote, and being naturalised.

“To get a British Overseas Territory Citizen (BOTC) passport you have to be naturalised.

“The naturalisation process falls under the British Nationality Act. The British Nationality Act is not Bermuda law, it’s British law,” he said.

“If you are a resident in Bermuda for five years and free of immigration control, in other words you’re not on a work permit, you’re here, you can come and go as you please.

“If you fulfil certain criteria like good conduct and you’re a good person with good moral turpitude you can make an application to Government House to become naturalised.

“Naturalised means that you then become a British Overseas Territory Citizen (BOTC) — you hold a so-called Bermuda passport. There is no vote tied to that and I think that has caused some confusion.

“You can have status and not hold a BOTC passport, you can do that. If you have (Bermuda) Status you can vote, but you can have Status and not necessarily have a BOTC.

“The same goes the other way, you could technically have a BOTC but the Bermuda Government is the one that gives Status. So you don’t necessarily give Status to someone to get a BOTC passport.”